Using Adverbs

Too often they're unnecessary baggage - the writer trying to hard to be a writer. I do the same.

Try this - go back over your story and take every single one out. And all the adjectives while you're at it. Then re-read it and only put those back that are 100% necessary, or change the wording to render them unnecessary. It'll make everything much tighter.

I read on someone's blog (I forget whose now) that using adverbs is a lot like telling instead of showing. If you can replace "verb + adverb" with a single verb that conveys the same idea, or rewrite it so that the action itself gets the point across without the need for the adverb, you're more likely to be showing than telling. In both the examples he gave and in my own revisions I've been surprised at how often that works out to be true.

I think like all advice the "avoid adverbs" dictum can be taken too far, of course. But my own writing does seem to get better the more I can revise away.

Hmm, if my writing improves when I remove them, maybe I should put lots of them in the rough draft...

Adverbs

Modifiers and qualifiers almost always hurt the flow of the writing. But you don't have to try to stop using adverbs, just remember to get rid of them in the rewrite.

What do not get enough complaints are adjectives. Used poorly, they can be worse than adverbs. Adjectives are almost always telling rather than showing, and can kill the best description.

I used to be terrible for adding adjectives and adverbs. I thought I was hot stuff. XD

The problem, as I see it, has already been mentioned; they're not needed and it can be considered showing rather than telling ... you're describing to the reader things that he/she should visualise for himself by reading character movements and diction.

However, by no means should you kill adjectives and adverbs entirely. When you use them sparingly, they can be powerful.

I looked up the blog I was thinking of, and it was "Flogging the Quill"

http://www.floggingthequill.com/flogging_the_quill/2006/02/how_to_show_whe.html

It isn't all about adverbs, but towards the end he gives the following (somewhat gruesome) example:

Another example, one that deals with the use of adverbs...

Telling: He stabbed the man furiously.

Click to expand...

I believe that the use of adverbs is merely a form of telling. Adverbs are approximations, mere stand-ins for action. As a result, they rarely give the reader much of an experience.

Click to expand...

I don't want to steal from another writer's blog, so I'll just recommend you follow the link above and have a look at the entire article, including the part where he rewrites the sentence to remove the adverb. It's a good read, even if that particular example is a tad on the gory side.

Angel_Of_The_Morning said:

You mean telling instead of showing, right?

The problem is, I use the adverbs to set the mood, and I can't think of how to set the same mood with just verbs. It's just something I should work on, I guess. It is easier to notice how irrelevant some of them are once I reread what I wrote, I think.

Thanks, everyone, for the wonderful advice!

Click to expand...

Oops. Yep, I meant telling instead of showing. Never post anything when you're really sleepy.

Angel_Of_The_Morning said:

"“So am I,” Althea said sincerely."

Click to expand...

This one is a great piece to play with. Instead of the adverb, that should never fall after a "said", it's serious telling and not showing, throw in some description as to how she looks or acts to display the sincerely. Like, she said as she batted her sad eyes, or Althea lowered her head and said, "So am I." Using active description in place of an adverb gives stronger impact to the sentence and gives you a chance to break away from standard cliches and create evocative images that will linger in your reader's mind like nicotine stains in a barroom.

It's currently 6:30am for me, and I haven't had my coffee yet, but at the risk of getting on a soapbox, I've been thinking...

Just why is telling weaker than showing?

I think it's because in real life, we don't get the "benefit" of an omniscient narrator sitting on our shoulder whispering to us that so-and-so is being sincere, or explaining the difference between slamming a door angrily, versus impatiently, versus in total humiliation. We have to look for certain cues, and guess other people's feelings and inner thoughts based on subtle signs.

One of the reasons we read in the first place is because good writing gives us practice picking up on those subtle cues, which is a delicate art and something we always need to hone our skills at. By telling rather than showing, we're leaving out the social cues that both make the story more realistic and make the reader more socially involved. Any time you have to decipher and respond to social cues, you feel more of a relationship (positive or negative!), whereas if you just read someone else's assessment, you never get personally involved--you feel like it's just facts.

If you have to guess a little, and you're never 100% certain you know exactly what the other person is thinking and feeling (like in real life), but you're still pretty certain you've read the signs right, then you're hooked. If the omniscient narrator tells you they were sincere or angry or melancholy, then you are relying on the narrator, and getting the story 3rd-hand, putting the narrator between you and the story. But if all you have are the cues, then you have to "guess" the characters thoughts and feelings by subjectivizing them--"What would make me act that way and do those things and say those things?" It happens automatically and subconsciously, and incidentally makes you, the reader, more involved in the story, because you're mirroring the character's mental and emotional states against your own in order to understand what their actions mean.

Ah well, I do ramble on. I guess what I'm saying is that it's better to not tell your readers that Desdemona was sincere, and make them guess, from the way she looked Jeffery straight in the eye, from the firm yet gentle touch of her hand on his knee, from the low, steady tone of her voice.

Of course, now I need to go do some revising of my own stuff

Ok end of soapbox, I'll go get my coffee now.

Angel_Of_The_Morning said:

and I admittedly do

Click to expand...

You admittedly do? The word adds nothing, for you are admitting the fact. Think of a marriage vow:
I do.
I admittedly do.

Angel_Of_The_Morning said:

“I don’t know, Louis. I have to think,” he let out slowly and laboriously."

Click to expand...

Rewrite as:
"I don't know," he said, "I have to think."
First, you can use the tag for the beat, eliminating the Louis. Second, you shouldn't use let out for said, and third, laboriously makes slowly redundant. Anyway, you're telling the reader after she's read it, so it's too late.

Angel_Of_The_Morning said:

"Soon after they hear a door slam deliberately and loudly." (not a dialogue problem, but still something I can't think of a way to rephrase)

Click to expand...

Soon after, they hear [heard] a door slam.
First, door slams are loud, and second, they have no way of knowing it's deliberate.

Angel_Of_The_Morning said:

"So am I,” Althea said sincerely.

Click to expand...

I can't think of a place to use sincerely in fiction, except in a query letter.

Angel_Of_The_Morning said:

Thanks for that website,

MarkN​

. That was very helpful. However, a lot of my adverbs occur within dialogue b/c I'm trying to convey the tone of voice the person is using. I'm sure there must be a better way to do it; I just haven't discovered it yet. I honestly don't know why I started doing it. . .a lot of my writing from a year ago doesn't have this sort of thing. Even though my writing has improved since then, this aspect apparently hasn't.

Here's​

some examples from my writing of what I'm talking about:
"“I don’t know, Louis. I have to think,” he let out slowly and laboriously."

"Soon after they hear a door slam deliberately and loudly." (not a dialogue problem, but still something I can't think of a way to rephrase)

"“So am I,” Althea said sincerely."

And there are others like this. Though, luckily, it has been declining lately, now that I've found out my problem.

Click to expand...

"So am I,” Althea said sincerely." You mean as opposed to insincerely? If she were being insincere, we'd all know it by her actions. Never, ever tell read how dialogue should be , or what the character means.


“I don’t know, Louis. I have to think,” he let out slowly and laboriously."

These are places where adverbs must be cut. Trust your dialogue more. Show how the characters are speaking by their expression, by the of their sentences, etc. If you have to tell a reader how a character is speaking, you've blown it.

Sometimes you can slow speech down with a simple ellipsis.

“I don’t know, Louis. I have to. . .well, I have to think."

And is his speech really laborious? If it is, it sure read like it, and by the time a reader word "laboriously," he's already read what the character has said.

As for: "Soon after they hear a door slam deliberately and loudly."

problems here. If the characters know the door is slamming deliberately, then so will the readers, and they'll know it same way the characters do. If the characters don't know the door is being slammed deliberately, then neither should the readers. And how can the characters know the slamming is deliberate? Maybe it was an accident. Or maybe the wind got it? But if the character can figure out that the door slamming is deliberate, then the readers can also figure it out without you telling them.

The other problem, a huge problem, is with the word "loudly." Have you ever in your life heard a door slam quietly? People know doors slam loudly, there's no other way to slam a door, so don't tell readers something they already know.

Angel_Of_The_Morning said:

Though, luckily, it has been declining lately, now that I've found out my problem.

Click to expand...

Your subconscious is your enemy.

There's another technique for avoiding adverbs that I use quite often. I add another sentence and change the dreaded adverb into something else. For example, your sentence:

"So do I," Althea replied sincerely.
Could become: "So do I." Althea sounded sincere this time.

Your next sentence:
Soon after they hear a door slam deliberately and loudly.
Could become: Soon after, they heard a door slam. A deliberate sound, as if someone moved by anger had done it. (or some such thing)

So, just two examples of how avoid adverbial phrases, in the absence of removing them entirely.

A little activity that might give you an idea of what your work sounds like with too many adverbs. I also use this when I'm editing a story. I only use adverbs that are necessary.

I use the find/replace feature in my word processor and bold everything with ly in it. Of course, you'll get a few words that are not adverbs, but I found that it helps me locate and remove adverbs. It also highlights sections that are adverb heavy and emphasizes how phony it sounds.

With a swish, swish of the red pen, the adverbs are wiped off the face of my manuscript.

Then, the bold can be reversed the same way and just as easily.

Something to think about.

I've found that some of my writing students have to go through a 'writing with lots of adverbs' stage as part of their growth as a writer. As they learn to use strong verbs, active voice and to 'show not tell', they stop using adverbs so much.

Tape yourself speaking to friends sometime, Angel, telling them about your night out or some such. Then listen to yourself. If you use lots of adverbs in your speech then it's a personal 'you' thing and you have to take note and edit hard in your writing.

For some reason it's a very American thing to be violently anti-adverb in your writing. The rest of the English speaking world is more relaxed about adverbs.

CaroGirl said:

There's another technique for avoiding adverbs that I use quite often. I add another sentence and change the dreaded adverb into something else. For example, your sentence:

"So do I," Althea replied sincerely.
Could become: "So do I." Althea sounded sincere this time.

Your next sentence:
Soon after they hear a door slam deliberately and loudly.
Could become: Soon after, they heard a door slam. A deliberate sound, as if someone moved by anger had done it. (or some such thing)

So, just two examples of how avoid adverbial phrases, in the absence of removing them entirely.

Click to expand...

I like your first change, but the slamming door has just as many problems this way.

I think teh big problem many new writers have isn't so much adverbs as it is the need to explain everything they write. You never need to explain. Explaining is either lazt wriitng, or lack of confidence. Trust yourself and trust the read, and if you find a spot where you have to explain, figure out why.

The problem is almost never that you're explaining in the wrong way. The problem is that you wrote the scene poorly.

Jamesaritchie said:

I think the big problem many new writers have isn't so much adverbs as it is the need to explain everything they write. You never need to explain.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's kind of what I was saying earlier. When you experience real life, you don't have a narrator explaining to you what things mean, so having a narrator explain the true significance of things makes the narrator a middleman between you and the story. It adds an extra layer, and keeps you from interacting as directly with it. Better to leave the events a little bit mysterious, like we experience them in real life. An artful arrangement of the proper clues will get the point across better than having some invisible Sherlock prematurely whisper the answer in your ear.

Not that narration is always a bad thing--properly handled, the "narrator" can also be a character (explicitly or implicitly) that the reader can relate to in the story). But it's not the narrator's job to give away information that the reader wouldn't be privy to if they were experiencing the events of the story in real life, within the constraints of the POV. And even then, the narrator is going to know more info than he/she necessarily should be telling at any given time.

Aw geez, I'm on my soap box again...

Adverbs are stage direction. They tell the reader what the writer thinks he should feel, rather than letting him feel it for himself. It weakens the reading experience, robs it of some of the interactive vitality that engages the reader in the first place.

caw.

I think you started a great thread Angel. Whatever I've posted has been mostly spouting theoretical, this-is-what-I've-heard kind of stuff, but just thinking about it and trying to apply it to my own writing has been really helpful to me too, so thanks for bringing it up.